I couldn't help but observe the robot naysayers posting in this thread are employed by cargo operators.

I curious which operators will be first to address this in the scope part of their CBAs?

 

Good points - I imagine that guy lives in domicile? From what I can tell, very junior pilots can trip trade into incredibly efficient trips if they want. But they will have to work - they can get the high TFP days but they are still long days and no one at SWA that I know has ever thought their last trip was a vacation or really even not come home tired....from flying days.

 

Everyone's discussed I'm sure - but it costs something. Do you trade money elsewhere for scope protections that few believe are even necessary as it's sooooo long away if ever?

 

We have a few "vacation" trips. They generally go senior and aren't terribly efficient. The AUA, PUJ, and LIR trips come to mind. Even those have 22-23 hours off max.

 

One more thing to consider is that SWA made huge gains in pay and retirement this last contract. In my opinion, that allows for more of the little quality of life contract issues to be solved next time around. Is that a valid assumption? No idea, I could be totally of base with that.

I went through the same choice a couple months ago and went with SWA. It's a personal decision based on many life factors. For my situation the money (I figured about 1.2 million over 15 years) wasn't worth it.

 

All depends on when you want to die.

Cargo, you will probably die soon after retirement.

 

Seems reasonable but stats don't seem to bear it out. I deadhead a lot on SWA and I would say the pilots look as old as any pilots out there. No doubt we have some guys that am hub turns have beaten up badly but I can't stress enough how having lots of time off at home and good amounts of time off on layovers is a huge benefit and allows you to exercise, got out of the hotel, and just relax. I get most of my "need to do" stuff done on layovers.

 

Good question. How much more solar radiation are SWA guys being exposed to by flying 900 hours/year in the day vs 400 hours at night?

 

Regarding long overnights. When I flew corporate we rarely had an overnight that was less than 24 hours. Oftentimes it was several days. Although occasionally it would be someplace fun like Aspen or Cancun, more often it was just another city like Oakland or Toluca. I enjoyed renting a car and exploring most of the time but I couldn't shake the feeling that I was wasting the days of my life. As I sat in Toluca for the 3rd night I realized that I was no good to my family when I was away for so long. And I was no good to the company. I was just babysitting an airplane as time ticked on.

At SW I sometime lament that the overnights aren't long enough, but honestly since our hotels are often located at the airport or in a business park rather than downtown or in a tourist area I am happy to get it over with ASAP. Get some fresh air, eat, sleep and get back to work so I can get home as soon as possible. It's not a glamorous life but at least it's productive. I get home quickly to the people I love. Typically 16-18 days off per month unless I get greedy and fly more.

My friends at FedEx love it and we have never discussed which is better. I suspect there are pros and cons to both. I think you couldn't go wrong no matter which you pick.

Personally I'd pick FedEx just so I could get up and pee whenever I want without it being a big ordeal!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

You get more radiation flying at night, especially the farther north or south you fly than anywhere else. Unfortunately, most of my flight are crossing the North Atlantic at night.
Retire working for the same company, married the the same person, wearing the same paints size is all that matters.
Cheers.